Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10331-05
Original file (10331-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
         DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
        
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
         2 NAVY ANNEX
         WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

SRB
Docket No. 10331-05
10 May 06




This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 Usc 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 2006. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HQMC memorandum 1560 MRRV of 25 January 2006, a copy of which is attached.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,


                                    W. DEAN PFIEFFER       
Executive Dir ector
Enclosure




DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
3280 RUSSELL ROAD
QUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5103
                                    IN REPLY REFER TO’
                                                               1580
                                                               MRRV
                                                               JAN 25 2005


MEMORAIIDUM FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

Subj:    BC NR APPLICATON IN THE


Ref:     (a) Phoncon btw HQMC MRRV and DFAS on 29 Jan 05

Chief Warrant Officer    states that he does not recall havincj the opportunity to convert from Veterans Edccat ion Assistance Program (VEAP) to the Montqomery 01 Bill (MGIB) program. He is requesting the opportunity to pay $2700 in order to become eligible for MGIB benefits.

Chief Warrant Officer    entered active duty on 13 March 1984, which made him eligible for VEAP. VEAP was a voluntary program available to members who initially entered into active duty between 1 January 1977 and 30 June 1985. The ehrollrnent period to open an account and contribute to VEAP ended on 1 April 1987.

The only VEAP era veterans that were allowed to convert to the MGIB program were veterans who had opened and made contributions to their account between 1 January 1977 and 1 April 1987. Per the reference, Chief Warrant Officer ‘‘ never opened or made contributions to a VEAP account, therefore, is ineligible tc) convert to MOTE benefits.

Based on the information reviewed, this office recommends that Chief Warrant Officer not be given the opportunity to enroll in VEAP or MGIB.

My point of contact concerning this matter is ~ and he can be reached at commercial (703) 784-9550 or DSN 278-9550.




By direction

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10363-05

    Original file (10363-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Per the reference, Colonel never opened or made contri~utj,~~ 5 to a VEAP account, therefore, was not eligible to participate in the MCIV program.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00727-06

    Original file (00727-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by HQMC memorandum 1560 of 2 March 2006, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06010-08

    Original file (06010-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 September 2008. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. VEAP era Service members were allowed to convert and contribute to the MGIB program during two conversion periods in 1996 and 2001, if they opened and made contributions to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10843-07

    Original file (10843-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1780 PER5-352G of 23 Jan 08, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07003-05

    Original file (07003-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077598C070215

    Original file (2002077598C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In that rebuttal she states that a memorandum prompted her to start an MGIB account, and submits a notification of a document titled “VEAP to MGIB Bill Conversion Open Season.” In that document it was stated that to be eligible for the conversion, a soldier had to be a VEAP participant on 9 October 1996. VEAP-era service members who never opened a VEAP account have no educational benefits as a veteran. If the applicant had proven that she had opened a VEAP account by making a deposit prior...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00826

    Original file (BC-2007-00826.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although he indicated that he elected to participate in the program via Part II of the DD Form 2057, the applicant never initiated an allotment to contribute. As such, he was never enrolled in the program. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10208-06

    Original file (10208-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC memo 1780 Pers 352G of 10 Jan 07, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, a majority of the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00759-06

    Original file (00759-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.SincerelyW. He had from the time he completed the DD Form 2057 until Congress closed VEAP to new enrollments for the last time on 31 March 1987 to start an allotment and become a participant. Although we believe all who have served on active duty deserve quality education benefits, allowing those who didn’t participate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 09043-05

    Original file (09043-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 2006. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. Per reference (b), the Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) was available to members who entered the military for the first time between 1 January 1977 and 30 June 1985.